An Administration Mess

This is just down the road from us. Let's hope our BOE is smarter than what you will read below.

Comment to D181 Board by Board Member-Elect Yvonne Mayer

From Hinsdale Talks Admin, Resident, on 04/22/09 at 09:49 pm

PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR APRIL 22, 2009 BOE MEETING
Good evening. I would first state that I am in agreement with all the comments that have been made. Second, I would like to commend each administrator for having provided excellent service to this district – in some cases for one year, and in others for many. Each one has weathered the storm that has been swirling for far too long now. Everyone should recognize these administrators for what they have accomplished and for the potential they have to continue to work to improve this district. Having said that, I am hopeful that before you vote on the three year contracts, you will address everyone’s concerns and explain why they are fiscally responsible. Then I’d ask you to explain why if you believe that all constituency groups will agree with your rationale, why not allow the new board to reach consensus on this issue and vote on it?

Next week, the incoming board will be the governing body that will work with the administration, teachers and community for the next four years. This is the group that the community elected to undertake this task. Decisions that impact three of those four years should not be decided by the outgoing board 6 days before the end of its term. Since administrative contracts have not typically been renewed by the board until late May or June, the question is why the board feels the urgency to approve them now, having had no public discussion earlier this year on the reasons or need to change the historical practice of giving one year contracts to non-superintendent administrators?

These contracts commit the district to paying a minimum of $1.8 million per year to 14 administrators for three years, and $1 million for 10 single year administrative contracts.

They cannot be terminated without cause unless huge buyouts are paid. No matter how bad the financial situation in this district gets in the next three years, the board will not be able to reduce the administrators. It will only be able to cut teachers, academic and extracurricular programs. Dr. Sabatino has been very honest that despite cutting $2.2 million from next year’s budget, more large cuts will be needed. No one wants to eliminate employees for financial reasons, but this vote will prevent the board from doing so should the financial situation warrant it? Many of the individual administrator salaries would support two, and in some cases three, full time teacher salaries or many more part time teacher positions. I am concerned that your action tonight will prevent the board from even considering cuts in the future that have the least impact on our students and be left with no choice but to cut teachers.

Decisions on next year’s contracts should be made after the new board first takes a hard look at the expenses to try and put off insolvency in 3 years. It is only logical that administrative contracts be part of this review. It is more prudent to review first and sign second. By approving tonight, you force the incoming board to review all three year contracts and decide whether to take steps to void them, if determines that it is fiscally irresponsible to have them stand. And while I can’t speak for the other incoming board members, I can say that I will call for this review, knowing that the community will hold the new board accountable for the long term impact of this vote.

The actions you take tonight will set the stage for the way this board, administration and the incoming board are received, respected or mistrusted by the community. Enough mistrust and damage to the district has been done over the last four years. It is time to move forward constructively and the first step in doing that is to allow the new board to make this critical financial decision.

Thank you.
Yvonne Mayer

Thank you!
Geralynn Walsh on Mon, 04/27/09 at 05:10 pm

Ms. Mayer -
We should all be thankful for watchful eyes!

Absolutely! Administrative contracts should be part of your review process. Granted, three years ago nobody knew what was headed our direction in terms of the economy but now we should be all the wiser. Moving forward under new contracts, it is our hope that teachers, academic and extracurricular programs remain untouched and instead the administrative fat be trimmed. The children should always ultimately benefit from these decisions.

Outgoing Board: Yes to 3-year Administrator Contracts
Molly Hughes,

Hinsdale Resident, on Tue, 04/28/09 at 03:31 pm

One might expect that after campaign season and then the election for village board and D181's board, Hinsdale's residents could take a breather. After all, how much can really happen in the few meetings scheduled after the election, before the new team takes office? A lot can happen, evidently, based on recent reports of BOE activities. Last Wednesday there was a special meeting of the BOE, intended particularly for the discussion and approval of controversial administrator contracts. If there were a headline for what occurred on April 22, it would be ”D181 Board Approves Costly, Binding Administrator Contracts, and Grows Administration.”

What happened at the meeting?I’ve heard from a few people who attended the meeting, which was scheduled at a tough time of day for any parent to attend: 5pm on a Wednesday afternoon. At that April 22 meeting, D181 Board of Education took the unprecedented act of voting to approve 3 year employment contracts for 7 administrators and making permanent (along with a 3 year contract) the position of Associate Superintendent (a temporary position created last year to help the interim superintendent). These 7 contracts, which cannot be terminated except for cause, will cost the district a minimum of $2.8 million over the next three years.

The Associate Superintendent position alone is costing the district $189,569 for one year, or $568,000 for three years. If terminated without cause, one administrator gets a 12-month buyout and the rest get six months. In addition, the Board approved 16 single year administrative contracts that will cost over $1.7 million next year. And they gave the Interim Superintendent a 25% raise. His salary for next year will be $1000/day for up to 120 days. The other administrators received raises for next year of as much as 4%.

Over 30 people attended the meeting. Nine community members and the President of the Teachers' Union spoke in opposition to the 3 year contracts and large raises. Five of the seven board members were present. Notably absent was Board member Andrew Schmidt., who indicated at the April 13 meeting that he supports these contracts.

Public comments essentially argued and raised the following points and questions:

1. In this economy, it is irresponsible to commit to paying so much in administrative salaries and commit to doing so for 3 years.

2. This action will prevent the Board from eliminating or negotiating administrative positions; so, teachers, academic or extracurricular programs will have to bear the cost of the administrative “lock-up” and thus be sacrificed to a degree that may not make the best sense for our kids. (It has already been projected that because the lower CPI index will reduce the revenue stream the district has relied on by millions over the next few years, the deficit will get bigger, and reserves will be spent down. In fact, the district projects that the reserves will be cut in half by 2012 -- to only $7.6 million -- and by 2014 the district will have spent all reserves and be forced to borrow money. Well before that, as the reserves are depleted, the bond and credit rating will be negatively impacted.)

3. Why would the board make the Associate Superintendent position permanent, when until last fall, this position had never existed?

4. Why are three year contracts necessary?

5. Why were the contracts being approved only 6 days before the new board was seated, when administrator contracts are not typically approved until late May or June? Why not let the new board, which will be leading the district over the next four years, reach consensus and vote on the contracts?

To the Board's credit, before voting unanimously to approve all of the contracts, each board member spoke and gave their rationales for approving them. The reasons included:

1. There has been large turnover in administrators over the last few years. Last summer, the board set a goal of addressing the turnover and finding a solution that would ensure stability with its administrative staff. Board member Mark Monyek referenced a discussion that the Board held last summer during a public weekend strategic planning session in which many administrators, board members and community members participated, as the meeting in which multi-year contracts had been discussed.

2. Last fall, the administration formed a committee of three administrators and one board member to address this issue and it made recommendations to implement three year contracts and pay competitive administrative salaries, after concluding that some administrators are underpaid and leave because multi-year contracts are not offered.

3. The current board is very pleased with the performance of its current administrators, wants them to stay and believes they deserve multi-year contracts.

4. The associate superintendent position is necessary to facilitate a smooth transition once the district hires a permanent superintendent.

5. Mr. Monyek stated that the salaries had already been incorporated into the forecasted budgets.

6. While some parents expressed concern that teachers or programs that directly impact children will be cut rather than administrators, Board Member Roseanne Rosenthal stated that she feels that the administrators do have a direct impact on our students due to their oversight responsibilities.

7. Board Member Linda Rio Reichmann stated that while she had previously abstained due to process issues, she felt they had been corrected and would now vote yes.

8. As to the size of Dr. Sabatino's raise, Ms. Armonda stated that the board cut a good deal ($800/day) when it first hired him, and he was not paid a competitive salary, since most candidates had asked for upwards of $1200/day. Now that the district is renewing his contract for a second year, it is only fair to pay him more and even the $1000/day is viewed by the Board as being below market.

9. As to why vote now and not wait for the new board, the sitting board members said that they were ready to vote on this in February, but one board member was absent, and the board did not vote in March because it felt it would be insensitive to vote on administrator multi-year contracts at the same meeting at which it was non-renewing many teachers.

Interestingly, aside from Mark Monyek's brief comments, the economic concerns raised by many parents were not directly addressed. The board did not address how it plans to cut millions from the budget starting in 2011, and did not economically justify its decisions to lock administrative positions for three years. Dr. Sabatino has stated at board meetings and PTO meetings that for the 2009-2010 budget, the administration is going to balance the budget and eliminate the $2.2 million dollar deficit. He has been heard to say that these cuts will be the "easy" ones to make -- since each department is currently analyzing their budgets and finding ways to tighten their belts. Fewer class room teachers are needed next year because of decreasing population and fewer special education teachers are needed because the program is being reconfigured. But because the forecasts indicate that CPI values will continue to be lower than in the past, the deficit will continue to grow and for the next several years, potentially millions more will have to be cut in order to balance the budget and prevent the district from spending down all of its reserves and going bankrupt by 2014.

So how can the district address the growing deficit issue? Since this vote last week, the stage is now set for the new board. Since the staff salaries and benefits make up more than 70% of the budget, there are not too many other areas that can see large cuts, without the obvious -- reduction in staff, teachers or programs. Even if the board were to decide to cut an administrative position, now that the contracts have been approved, it would have to pay at least a six month buyout. And as with all buyouts, the district spends money and gets nothing in return, just as it did when it paid Dr. Tenbush over $170,000 in severance payments, for his one year of service.

Looking carefully at the stability argument that the board members stated as a reason for offering multi-year contracts, that argument just doesn’t make sense. At the April 22 meeting, one community member pointed out that a careful look at what's happened in the last four years has led many in the community to believe that the loss of administrators was not due to the lack of competitive salaries or multi-year contracts. Many believe it was due to the current board pushing former Superintendent Curley into early retirement, its actions against other administrators and the way it treated them, and its actions and selection of administrators and actions of Dr. James Tenbusch. Perhaps there is more of a morale issue at work here. In fact, since 50% of the administrators who were offered 3 year contracts after the April 13 BOW meeting declined this offer one can conclude that contract term is not a central driver of their career decisions.

But even if one were to accept the board's stability argument, it flies in the face of the economic reality of our times. All around us people are losing their jobs, not finding new ones, going bankrupt or having their homes foreclosed. Most service industries are down sizing, imposing salary freezes or salary reductions. People in the service industry are grateful to keep their jobs and don't expect to be given huge raises. It makes no economic sense to give up to 25% raises and commit the district to three years of high salaries, when there is no end in sight to fiscal crisis in the district, local and federal governments and average taxpayer are facing.

Whether one buys the board’s rationale or not, the truth is simple: the vote to lock in administrator contracts and increase the size of our administration adds cost that we can scarcely afford and sets the new board up for a tougher job.

Growing Up Online - A Must See for Parents of Teenagers

"...Must-see TV for all parents. ... I guarantee it will startle with what it finds kids are doing online and just how vast the divide is between how kids and adults use the Internet.
What makes this documentary so great is how matter-of-fact and even-handed it is... "
Ted Cox, Chicago Daily Herald

Summary:
Jessica Hunter was a shy and awkward girl who struggled to make friends at school. Then, at age 14, she reinvented herself online as Autumn Edows, a goth artist and model. She posted provocative photos of herself on the Web and fast developed a cult following.

"I just became this whole different person," Autumn tells FRONTLINE. "I didn't feel like myself, but I liked the fact that I didn't feel like myself. I felt like someone completely different. I felt like I was famous."

News of Jessica's growing fame as Autumn Edows reached her parents only by accident. "I got a phone call, and the principal says one of the parents had seen disturbing photographs and material of Jessica," her father tells FRONTLINE. "I had no idea what she was doing on the Internet. That was a big surprise."

In Growing Up Online, FRONTLINE takes viewers inside the very public private worlds that kids are creating online, raising important questions about how the Internet is transforming childhood. "The Internet and the digital world was something that belonged to adults, and now it's something that really is the province of teenagers, " says C.J. Pascoe, a postdoctoral scholar with the University of California, Berkeley's Digital Youth Research project.

"They're able to have a private space, even while they're still at home. They're able to communicate with their friends and have an entire social life outside of the purview of their parents, without actually having to leave the house."

As more and more kids grow up online, parents are finding themselves on the outside looking in. "I remember being 11; I remember being 13; I remember being 16, and I remember having secrets," mother of four Evan Skinner says. "But it's really hard when it's the other side."

At school, teachers are trying to figure out how to reach a generation that no longer reads books or newspapers. "We can't possibly expect the learner of today to be engrossed by someone who speaks in a monotone voice with a piece of chalk in their hand," one school principal says.

"We almost have to be entertainers," social studies teacher Steve Maher tells FRONTLINE. "They consume so much media. We have to cut through that cloud of information around them, cut through that media, and capture their attention."

Fears of online predators have led teachers and parents to focus heavily on keeping kids safe online. But many children think these fears are misplaced. "My parents don't understand that I've spent pretty much since second grade online," one ninth-grader says. "I know what to avoid."

Many Internet experts agree with the kids. "Everyone is panicking about sexual predators online. That's what parents are afraid of; that's what parents are paying attention to," says Parry Aftab, an Internet security expert and executive director of WiredSafety.org. But the real concern, she says, is the trouble that kids might get into on their own. Through social networking and other Web sites, kids with eating disorders share tips about staying thin, and depressed kids can share information about the best ways to commit suicide.

Another threat is "cyberbullying," as schoolyard taunts, insults and rumors find their way online. John Halligan's son Ryan was bullied for months at school and online before he ultimately hanged himself in October 2003. "I clearly made a mistake putting that computer in his room. I allowed the computer to become too much of his life," Halligan tells FRONTLINE. "The computer and the Internet were not the cause of my son's suicide, but I believe they helped amplify and accelerate the hurt and the pain that he was trying to deal with that started in person, in the real world."

"You have a generation faced with a society with fundamentally different properties, thanks to the Internet," says Danah Boyd, a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society.
"It's a question for us of how we teach ourselves and our children to live in a society where these properties are fundamentally a way of life. This is public life today."

Growing Up Online - Watch it now by clicking the link below!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/kidsonline/view/main.html

Counting Down the Days

Less than 30 days until Summer break!!

Important Dates:

May 5 - PTA Board Meeting @ 7 p.m.

May 12 - Pleasant Dale Park Board Meeting @ 6:30 p.m.

May 15 - PTA President's Dinner @ 7 p.m.

May 20- School Board Meeting @ 7 p.m.

May 25 - No School

May 29 - 1/2 Day of School

June 4 - Last Day of School

Annie - The Middle School Musical!

Congratulations to the entire cast and crew of Annie, Jr. and to musical directors Larry Neumann and Tony Tatina for doing such a fantastic job on the play!

The performance was top-notch and enjoyed by many!

Way to go, you should all be very proud!!

Broadcasting School Board Meetings

School board meetings in La Grange School District 102 are broadcast on the Internet and can be accessed via the district's website. We believe this is a fantastic avenue that allows their community to stay involved and informed despite demanding personal schedules. District 102 board meetings can be accessed at a later time and date and wherever listeners choose to tune in.

A few recent meetings can be heard at the following links:

http://www.dist102.k12.il.us/boardofed/recordings/BoardMeeting3-12-2009.mp3

http://www.dist102.k12.il.us/boardofed/recordings/BoardMeeting3-31-2009.mp3

http://www.dist102.k12.il.us/boardofed/recordings/BoardMeeting4-16-2009.mp3

Hats off to School District 102 for making their school board meetings accessible to the residents of the community that may be unable to attend their meetings!

We are working hard to bring Pleasantdale School Board meetings to the residents of our district in a similar fashion. Stay tuned!

A Prediction

Our prediction for the 2009/2010 school year: Willow Springs village board trustee Annette Kaptur will be hired as a new middle school teacher. We predict this because, in politics, one hand always washes the other.

Check back to see if this prediction is correct.

LTHS - A "Prudent and Cautious" School Board!

Summer Improvements Scaled Back

Responding to the nation's current economic downturn and in an effort to remain fiscally responsible, the LT Board of Education scaled back facility improvement projects slated for 2009-2010 from a proposed $2.4 million to less than $250,000. No educational services or programming will be negatively impacted and those projects that were delayed will continue to be studied and planned for subsequent years.

The following projects were approved for summer 2009.

North Campus
- pool and locker replacement/upgrades - $94,743
- masonry tuck pointing - $30,000

South Campus
- Public Address system - $45,000
- 13 boys athletic showers restored from storage room - $35,000

North & South Campus
- door replacements - $30,000

Total: $234,743

More than $2.1 million in projects were postponed until at least the summer of 2010. A 50-year old boiler at North Campus was put on hold after careful consideration and hearing recommendations from the maintenance director and a consultant, both of whom believe the boiler may last up to four more years with thorough maintenance. Substantial upgrades to the South Campus boys' and girls' physical education athletic locker rooms were also deferred along with ceiling/lighting/flooring upgrades to 21 classrooms at both campuses. Relocation of the Testing Office, upgrades to the North Campus Assistant Principal's Office, switches for data networking, and air conditioning in the Business Education computer labs were also tabled for future discussion.

While more than $1.3 million in new sources of revenue are anticipated in the 2009-2010 fiscal year, including LaGrange TIF, the Hodgkins Quarry TIF and the Burr Ridge Town Center, Board members expressed concern that those monies may not be collected if local businesses fail or may be offset by decreases in revenues from other sources impacting the entire state.

Facilities Committee Chairman Jim Kohlstedt said, "This Board and prior Boards have been very prudent and cautious in spending taxpayer money. During our last bond issue, we had and opportunity to upgrade facilities and address maintenance and safety issues necessary to bring our aging facilities up to date. Our staff has worked hard to maintain existing boilers and equipment, and we believe this allows us to cut back on facility expenditures this year without jeopardizing the health or safety of our students and employees."

Magic Numbers!

Now you see 'em, now you don't...there's magic in them numbers!!

Check this out...

At the January 21st Board of Education (BOE) meeting, the estimate for elementary school construction project was announced at $190,870 which included a project contingency of $38,174.

Superintendent Mark Fredisdorf stated in The Doings on March 5th, "The project will be bid in a very competitive economic environment saving taxpayers in the long run. The entire project should come in under $200,000."

Below you will see the estimate from STR Consulting at $190,870, and right next to it, a "new" estimate of $254,000. Did you see how all those numbers changed? It must be magic!

Click on the documents to enlarge them. Notice the words on the document on the right, "Based on our February 18 estimate..."

According to the ad the district published in the newspaper, the bidding documents/blueprints were available on February 16, two days before the "new" estimate was made.

There was a Board of Education meeting the evening of February 18, shouldn't it have been mentioned to the members of the BOE that the construction estimate increased? Isn't this information important to them as well as members of the community? Apparently not when an election is looming and you want to fly under the radar!

The February meeting minutes can be viewed here: http://www.d107.org/media/Board/minutes-agendas/2009_02_18_Minutes.pdf and not one mention is made of a "new" estimate.

The above memo from STR Partners is dated March 12. Our BOE receives an email update every week from the superintendent. Was this information included in their weekly update? The "new" estimate reflected an increase in the cost of the construction project to the tune of $63,000. They should have received an update about this, right?

The change in the estimate was also never mentioned at the March 18th meeting. Meeting minutes can be viewed here: http://www.d107.org/media/Board/minutes-agendas/2009_03_18_Minutes.pdf

This was an INCREASE of $63,000! Shouldn't it have been mentioned at one of these board meetings? Did the BOE not know about this "new" estimate or did they pretend not to see it?

In an email sent to community members on April 5th, just 2 days before the election, board member Patti Essig wrote: "Getting the facts Right... The current 2008/2009 school budget, following public review and discussion, approved allocated funding for the Elementary School entryway remodel in the amount of $200,000. At the January, 2009 Board of Education (BOE) meeting, the Superintendent's report included architectural estimates for this project in the amount of $190,870 which included a $38,174 project contingency. At the March, 2009 BOE meeting, it was reported that subsequent to the public bid opening, the lowest bid had to be discounted because it did not meet the bid specifications. The other bids were being researched and reviewed. The BOE has not taken any action on this item."

She never even mentioned the "new" estimate. Was she aware of it? Were any of the BOE members aware of it? Hmmm, maybe there really never was a "new" estimate.

The superintendent's report on April 15 states, "Per the cost breakdown, the estimated cost of the project is $254,000. Construction Solutions' bid is $236,723 which is $17,277 under the estimate."

Umm, hello??? Wasn't the estimate $190,870? It looks like they're over the estimate!

On Wednesday, April 15th the Board of Education voted 5 to 1 to approve Superintendent Fredisdorf's recommendation to move forward with spending $236,723 on an 826 square foot office renovation. All in the name of "security" or was it "safety?" It's hard to remember since the story changed so many times.

The important thing is that the superintendent wants the community to believe that this project came in "under budget." Sorry, but this community is not that dumb!

As we've said all along...it's just smoke and mirrors, and now even a little magic!

April School Board Meeting Agenda

Thank goodness the election is over...now the summer construction projects can get back on track.

Below you will see the agenda for the April School Board meeting.


In addition to the construction report, a few other important discussions will take place at the April School Board Meeting.

The new math textbook adoption will be discussed. Since our math series is 10 years old, this is a welcome change. Thanks to all who worked so hard to make this happen.

The bids/contracts for service providers will be reviewed. In this discussion, you will be able to see where some of your tax dollars go.

Of even greater importance will be the Remedial Reading Program Review. If you have a child in the remedial reading program or if your child has been recommended for summer school, this is one meeting you will not want to miss.

Young children spend their early grade level years "learning to read." By third grade, they are "reading to learn." Children reading below grade level by third grade often struggle throughout their entire lives - without intervention, 74% never catch up. The difference between children who can read at grade level and those who can't is known among educators as the third grade reading gap.

The effects of the third grade reading gap is felt throughout the entire community - economically, socially and culturally - now, and in the long run.

A recommended book on this topic is The 90% Reading Goal by Lynn Fielding, Nancy Kerr and Paul Rosier. A review of the book can be found here: http://virtual-institute.us/90%25.htm.

Additional information can be found at the National Children's Reading Foundation. Go to http://www.readingfoundation.org/ and click on the research link.

One of our goals is to increase attendance at board meeting in addition to broadcasting them on the Internet. Please try to attend this month's meeting on April 15 at 7:00 p.m. at the middle school to help us build community awareness and involvement.

Chicago Parents Guide to Testing

Posted August 20th, 2007 by fairtest in fact sheets k-12

• Parents, do you believe that either the Iowa (ITBS) or the high school TAP tests alone accurately measure your child's abilities?
• Do you believe that, if your child works hard enough, he orshe should be able to "pass" the ITBS or TAP?
• How much do you really know about the ITBS and TAP tests, on which so much of your child's future depends?

This booklet was written especially for Chicago Public School parents bytheLSC Summit, a coalition of Chicago parent and school reform groups togetherwith FairTest, a nationally-recognized organization specializing in issues of student testing.

ITBS refers to the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills given to 3rd. through 8th. grade students in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS).

TAP refers to the Tests of Achievement and Proficiency given to CPS 9th and 11th graders.

The ITBS and TAP tests are published by Riverside Publishing Company.

Parents, you need to know that...

• The ITBS/TAP do not test many important educational areas.
• There are many other educationally sound ways to assess children'd learning.
• ITBS/TAP Test scores do not tell you what students know or are able to do; they only tell you how your child compares to other students.
• Half the ITBS/TAP test-takers will always score below average.
• ITBS/TAP tests use obscure or tricky questions to sort and rank students.
• The margin of error of ITBS/TAP test results is too great to use those results alone to make important educational decisions and a violation of the rules for using these tests.

Overemphasis on ITBS and TAP tests may lower the quality of your child's education
Just as you may be a good driver even if you do not know the way to the airport, children may be good students in reading and math and still choose wrong answers to ITBS/TAP questions. There is a lot more to reading and math than multiple-choice questions-- such as those on ITBS/TAP tests-- can measure.

Also, ITBS/TAP tests do not test writing, science, social studies, the arts, or other areas of state and district educational standards. Multiple choice tests cannot test most higher-level thinking skills. They do not test skills students need to get into college or qualify for a job.

These tests cannot determine if a student can write a research paper or a short story, use history as a context for understanding current events, construct tables and charts to show the results of a science experiment or interpret those results, discuss the differences in poetic writing styles, or debate important issues. They don't test problem-solving, decision-making, judgment, social skills, or citizenship.

In other words, they do little to test your child's ability to function and succeed in their real-world environment.

Schools may be forced to "dumb down" education when these tests are overemphasized.
Overemphasis on ITBS/TAP tests encourages schools to "teach to the test," that is, to spend lots of instructional time having students practice how to answer questions like those on ITBS/TAP tests. Many educators believe that teaching to these tests results in inferior teaching and a weakened curriculum which do not serve our children.

Research shows that students make stronger long-term achievement gains when the emphasis is on improved teaching methods which engage and challenge children and not on multiple-choice or short-answer testing.

But CPS schools are being pressured to narrow the curriculum and spend weeks in test-preparation activities. The CPS summer school bridge functions largely as a test-coaching program.

High-achieving school systems do not narrowly teach to tests like the ITBS or TAP. These schools offer their children a rich, challenging curriculum which prepares them for college and career.

Research shows that teaching practices in high-minority classrooms are affected more by these tests which emphasize low level thinking and knowledge.

"Much of the work assigned to Chicago students fails to go beyond reproduction of information, such as filling in blanks with vocabulary words....if students are exposed only to such assignments, it is unlikely they will learn to succeed in the more demanding intellectual challenges posed by the modern workplace and by civic and personal affairs."

From Report Astract for The Quality of Intellectual Work in Chicago Schools: A Baseline Report Consortium on Chicago School Research, November 1998

There are better, more educationally sound ways to assess children's learning.
Isn't the road test you take behind the wheel of a car, which is a practical performance test, a better indicator of how well you can drive than any pencil-and-paper exam? Many educators believe that this kind of performance-based test provides much better information about what students know and are able to do than the ITBS/TAP tests by themselves.

There are better ways to assess student learning and school quality. For example, many CPS teachers are using portfolios -- collections of student work-- to assess student learning in subjects all across the curriculum.

Effective student assessment can include observation, samples of student work, essays, lab experiments, public presentations and exhibitions, group projects focused on solving real-world problems, and the kinds of quizzes and tests teachers already use.

Experts agree that tests such as ITBS and TAP are used properly only when they are used as one piece of information in a comprehensive system of assessment.

ITBS and TAP tests have significant limitations.
ITBS/TAP test scores do not tell you what students know or are able to do; they only tell you how your child compares to other students.

The ITBS/TAP tests are norm-referenced tests. This means that they are designed to sort and rank students on a curve.

Norm-referenced tests like the ITBS and TAP are not made to measure if students have learned what they have been taught in their school's curriculum. ITBS/TAP test scores can only tell you how you child compares to a national reference group.

This is a bell-shaped "normal" curve. Questions on norm-referenced tests are carefully selected to produce a score curve like this, in which only a few students score very high, only a few students score very low, and most students score in the middle. These tests are also designed so that half of the students taking the test will end up below the middle score – which is called the "average" – and half will end up above. This guarantees that half of the students will always score "below average" on such tests.

Half the ITBS/TAP test-takers will always score below average.

The ITBS and TAP tests do not have a "passing" grade. They are not the same as the written test you take to get a driver's license. On that test, it is possible for everyone to get enough answers right to pass, if they learn the information. But ITBS/TAP tests are made so that one-half of the students in the nation who take them always score below average. On other words, one half of those students will always score below the grade equivalent (GE).

ITBS/TAP tests use obscure or tricky questions to sort or rank students.
If the driver's test were used to sort or rank people, it would have to include some questions not everyone would get right. It might ask, "How do you get from Union Station to O'Hare Airport?" or "What is the chemical composition of diesel fuel?," facts which are not taught in the standard drivers' education classes and which are not relevant to good driving.

To sort or rank students, ITBS/TAP tests also include some questions which are designed to sort kids out. A close look at these kinds of questions shows that they may have more than one answer which many people would consider correct.

For example:Children often select "old". The test maker says the right answer is "wise". This kind of question could trip up many students, including those from cultures strongly identifying wisdom with age.

The margin of error of ITBS/TAP test results is too great to use those results alone to make important educational decisions.

Test scores are an estimate, they are not exact. Every test has a margin of error. Different versions of the test, the number of questions on the test, simple mistakes like filling in the wrong bubble, or even a child's mood on a given day can affect his or her score.

This margin of error is one reason that the Riverside Publishing Company tells school districts not to use the ITBS/TAP test scores as a single basis for making decisions like grade retention. "Single basis" means a situation where a certain test score must be reached or a student will be held back, regardless of other factors. One wrong answer on these tests can make the difference in whether your child is promoted or retained.

The way CPS uses the ITBS/TAP tests to make important decisions about students is a violation of the rules for using these tests.

The lead author of the ITBS for Riverside Publishing Company, H.D. Hoover, recently said that "a single test should never be used as the sole basis to make decisions such as promotion and retention."

CPS signed an agreement with Riverside Publishing Company to use the ITBS and TAP tests. This agreement states that CPS will not label students based on a single test score.
The ITBS and TAP test manuals state clearly that it is inappropriate to use ITBS results to decide to retain students at a grade level. Using ITBS/TAP tests to make such high-stakes decisions also violates the measurement profession's Standards.

Experts agree that other information including teacher and parent input must be considered when making to such an important decision as retaining a student.

Research has shown repeatedly that grade retention – holding students back for another year in the same grade – does not work and actually harms students. These studies show that after a couple of years, students who were retained do less well than similar students who were not retained. There are few educational practices proven to be as damaging to students as retention.

Retention also hits hardest on low-income and minority children. Ernest House, a noted educational researcher, stated, "Chicago would not have its retention program if its student population were not 89% minority. By contrast, a survey of fifteen Chicago suburban school districts indicated that (they) retained fewer than one percent of their students. It is the inner city with large minority populations where these harmful programs are implemented en masse."
So CPS is using an inadequate measure – the ITBS/TAP – as the basis for carrying out a policy which has been proven to damage children – grade retention.

What is better than retention? Real, long-term improvements in student achievement occur when schools provide supports to children as soon as they begin to fall behind, regularly assess programs for their effectiveness, offer early childhood education, use resources to attract more qualified teachers, lower class size, fund better materials, and provide more high-quality teacher training and support.

Parents, now that you know more about the ITBS/TAP tests, what can you do?
Ask your Local School Council to hold a school-wide discussion on the topic of the ITBS or TAP tests and how they are used in the Chicago Public Schools.

Find out more about the legal issues related to retained children by calling the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, 312/630-9744

Call or write to the Riverside Publishing Company to ask them to discontinue CPS use of these tests until CPS complies with the rules.

Learn more about this topic by calling any of the sponsoring organizations.

Winners

"Winners never quit and quitters never win." ~ Vince Lombardi

While our entire slate may not have won this election, we feel like winners in many ways. First of all, this was a very close race. Incumbents are hard to beat, especially when they have been in our school system for 8 plus years and are well-known. This race was decided by less than 90 votes between the top and bottom vote getters. A pretty good showing, we think, for three challengers who haven't had children in the district that long.

We are proud of our accomplishments and appreciative of our many supporters. We consistently made new friends on this journey that kept us energized and helped strengthen our will.

We may have lost, but we won many small victories and learned a lot along the way. We won the hearts of residents who "had no idea." We won the support of parents who thought no one else felt the way they did or shared their concerns. We informed many taxpayers on the consumer price index and the predicament school districts are in now that it is so low. We won the right to post signs and campaign outside the middle school polling place - something that hasn't been "allowed" by the superintendent for the past seven years. We enlightened many residents and are confident that they will continue to travel with us on our trek to put the community back into the school. Every community has a school, but not every school has a community.

We want to thank our many supporters. We couldn't have done it without you and we will indeed be back again in 2011!

We also learned a lot about politics and self-serving politicians from two local municipalities. Shame, shame, shame...you know who you are!

Finally, thanks to Dina Stone for commenting openly on our blog. We appreciate her sincerity and apology!

Winners and Losers

There are winners and then there are losers. For now, we are going to focus on the winners.

Congratulations to Karen O’Halloran for getting the highest number of votes in the Pleasantdale School Board Election and winning a seat on the board. Her passion and drive were unparallelled. We are confident she will carry our voice at board meetings where she will represent each and every member of our community.

Congratulations to Mark Mirabile. I had the pleasure of spending the day with Mark and his wife, Judy and was grateful that we got the chance to know one another better and to realize that we share many of the same views. They are good people and I look forward to continuing our work together on the communication team to serve the needs of our district.

Congratulations to Patti Essig and Leandra Sedlack. They will again be able to hand their children their diplomas when they walk across the stage at graduation this year. We trust that they will continue to serve the best interests of the entire community during the next four years.

There were many other winners, some even before the votes were tallied.

The teachers were winners. We hope that by sharing their “voices” with the community we were able to raise awareness to their plight. We had hoped that by winning we would be able to make some positive changes on their behalf. We can only hope that the awareness that was raised will lead to fairer practices and garner them the respect that they deserve.

The community won as well. This blog was started so that everyone’s voice would be heard. Our stats outpaced themselves almost on a daily basis. It was evident to us and to others that this was one way for residents to communicate whether it was openly or anonymously.

We hope that by bringing to light many of the concerns of the community, our superintendent Mark Fredisdorf, will take notice that smoke and mirrors will not make problems, concerns, complaints and parents just go away. When the dust settles, they will always remain. We hope that he will set aside his monopoly on our school district and work together with the community in making our schools the very best they can be. We will remain ever vigilant to the needs all district residents, especially the children.

We plan to keep our blog open because we feel this is one avenue of communication that will continue to grow. Not every blog on the Internet is what you’d like it to be. Some are politically correct so as not to rock the boat, and others seek to bring truth to light. Our intention is and will remain to shed light on the wrongs and the rights, the good and the bad, and unfortunately, even sometimes the ugly.

Please click on the link to the right to subscribe to our blog. If you would like to contribute a column to the main page, please send us an email to pleasantdaleblog@gmail.com.

Finally, in true Chicago form, we say, see ya next election…it’s only 730 days away and there is much more work to be done!

Candidates: votes
Karen O'Halloran: 690 votes
Mark Mirabile: 659 votes
Patti Essig: 658 votes
Leandra Sedlack: 651 votes
Gina Scaletta-Nelson: 619 votes
Lauri Valentin: 573 votes
Michael Rak: 562 votes

The Big Results

The results are in and the winners are???

Incumbent Email

In the interest of full disclosure we want to comment on an email that is circulating in our district.

Dear Community Members,
The Pleasantdale School District 107 School Board election is scheduled for Tuesday, April 7. Recent campaign literature distributed by the opposition has included statements that we feel are mere snippets of the truth. We feel that you as voters need to have factual information to decide who is best to serve on the Pleasantdale School Board. To that end, we are providing the facts to statements our challengers have distributed that are incorrect or misleading.

Getting the Facts Right
Planning to spend $210,000 on an 826 square foot office renovation
The current 2008/2009 school budget, following public review and discussion, approved allocated funding for the Elementary School entryway remodel in the amount of $200,000. At the January, 2009 Board of Education (BOE) meeting, the Superintendent's report included architectural estimates for this project in the amount of $190,870 which included a $38,174 project contingency. At the March, 2009 BOE meeting, it was reported that subsequent to the public bid opening, the lowest bid had to be discounted because it did not meet the bid specifications. The other bids were being researched and reviewed. The BOE has not taken any action on this item.

The BOE has not taken any action on this item because they are waiting until after the election since it is a controversial topic. At the bid opening, bids ranged from $216,950 to $338, 523. The average bid was $278,829. Dr. Fredisdorf is quoted in the Doings as saying that “The entire project should come in under $200,000.” Further he alluded to the fact that there is a potential fire hazard. If this was the case, why wasn’t a letter sent to every family at the elementary school informing them of this problem? We had to contact the Regional Office of Education to get the facts. Only then, did Dr. Fredisdorf acknowledge that the real problem was that there were not enough outlets in the main office. After speaking with a contractor that bid on the project we learned that the electrical re-wiring was the smallest portion of the bid. The majority of the bid was a very large new HVAC system. So why doesn’t the district administration TELL THE TRUTH about the construction project? Are we remodeling this office for security, safety or a new heating and air conditioning system? Again, the board has not been fully informed of this project by the administration since it was not discussed at any board meetings under the open meetings act when it should have been.

Increased Preschool and Extended Day Kindergarten tuition 44%
At the October, 2007 BOE meeting, the Superintendent's report included a recommendation to "increase Bright Beginnings Preschool and Extended Day Kindergarten." "The increase would serve to reduce the amount the district currently subsidizes [for] direct costs while keeping our fee structure competitive with other high quality preschool options in the area." These fees had remained unchanged for the past 10 years. The minutes report that "Board member Mirabile requested that we review the policy manual regarding fees and suggested adding language that states fees would be reviewed every two to three years." The review of fee based programs occurs annually per the BOE's Pro Forma Calendar.

Per Board Policy, Curriculum and Instruction 6.35 Supplemental Academic Programs, the District may offer supplemental programs not required by Illinois School Code. Furthermore, the District retains the right to charge fees to participants that cover both direct and indirect costs of programs. The District also reserves the right to waive fees or to seek scholarship funding for economically disadvantaged families. At the August, 2008 BOE meeting, the BOE voted unanimously to approve an action item that included "provide reductions or scholarships for families qualifying 'for' free and reduced lunch per Federal guidelines. Families eligible for free lunch would receive a full scholarship. Families eligible for reduced lunch would receive a scholarship for 75% of the full tuition."

The superintendent stated at the July 2008 BOE meeting "The increase would serve to reduce the amount the district currently subsidizes [for] direct costs while keeping our fee structure competitive with other high quality preschool options in the area."

First of all, Pleasantdale is the ONLY district that houses a private preschool program which is subsidized by the entire district. Dr. Fredisdorf used figures from preschools including Grand Avenue in LaGrange Highlands. This program does not receive subsidies from School District 106, they merely rent space from the district. In essence district 106 is earning money from the preschool program whereas we are losing money on our program. The deficit for the 2008/2009 school year is approximately $234,000. Couldn’t this money be spent to benefit the ENTIRE district rather than the less than 100 children that use it? Pleasantdale does provide scholarships and they should since this money is coming from the taxpayers. The BOE never would have approved these scholarships if it wasn’t for the many, many parents that attended the meetings to protest the increase and the fact that the tuition increase would exclude even more children from the program. Basically, the BOE approved the scholarships because the community was so irate about the fact that many children that can’t afford the $362 per month for the five day program are excluded.

Refuse to provide a free full day kindergarten program to give all kids an advantage
At the July, 2008 BOE meeting, a Full Day Kindergarten Program was discussed. The minutes report that "After Board discussion, it was decided that the district would not pursue researching the full day kindergarten option. Board member Mark Mirabile stated that the handouts only showed at risk students benefiting from full day but not all students." Presently, full district subsidies are provided for at risk students.

According to the Board Policy, Curriculum and Instruction 6.35 Supplemental Academic Programs “Upon Board of Education approval, the District may offer supplemental programs not required by Illinois School Code. These programs may include, but are not limited to:
• Summer school
• Preschool for children aged 3 and 4
• Full-day kindergarten
Nowhere in this policy does it state the “Extended Day Program.” The BOE’s decision was that they would not pursue researching full day kindergarten options. The district is currently paying FULL teacher salaries for the extended day program but the teachers are not allowed to cover any new material. Is this being fiscally prudent? Why doesn’t the district hire day care workers to cut their expenses since basically that is what the extended day program is? It has been clearly stated that we do not have a full day kindergarten program; it is called an extended day program because if the district called it kindergarten, they would not be allowed to charge money for it. Currently 1581 schools in Illinois provide a free full day kindergarten option and we believe that our district should provide a free full day kindergarten program as well since we are already paying the teachers to be there.

Refusing to apply for a grant to aid the districts low to middle income families
In May 2008, the District received a letter from the Illinois State Board of Education stating that "Once all of the children in priority 1 (… applicants that propose to serve primarily, at least 51%, children who have been identified as being at risk of academic failure) and priority 2 ( … applicants proposing to serve primarily, at least 51%, children whose family's income is less than four times the poverty level) are served, it is the intention of Preschool for All to fund programs like Pleasantdale School District 107 that are serving children who do not qualify under priority 1 or priority 2. This is dependent on a continuing increase in Early Childhood Funding and at this time I do not have an estimate of when that will be. Up to this date, only programs serving children in the first priority have been funded." Presently, full district subsidies are provided for at risk students.

Full district subsidies are available for some at risk students, but not all. The term “at risk” means at risk of academic failure. Students from non-English speaking homes are considered “at risk.” Children born to teenage parents are considered “at risk.” Children from low-income households are considered “at risk.” Children from substance abuse families are considered “at risk.” The list goes on and on. Yes, our district provides subsidies for SOME at risk students, but not all.

The state of Illinois is currently accepting applications for the Preschool for All grant. We are simply asking that our district put forth a concerted effort to win this grant. LaGrange Highlands School District 106, LaGrange School District s 102 and 105, Gower School District 62 are among the many school districts that have been awarded this grant. Why can’t we be among them?

Approve of spending over $775,000 for six administrators for the smallest of all the feeder schools
A feeder district for comparison is Highlands Elementary School District 106 which has one elementary school and one middle school all housed under one roof. According to the 2008 Illinois State Report Card, they have a student population of 896 compared to Pleasantdale's student population of 837. The most recently reported six administrator salaries for Pleasantdale is $767,842 while Highlands has reported salaries of $726,661 for five administrators with two additional director salaries that were unavailable for reference. An analysis of township salary information indicates that Pleasantdale actually spends near the township average for administrative salaries.

How is this for a comparison?
Lyons Township High School Enrollment= 3,840 students
Superintendent Tim Kilrea's salary for the 2009/20010 school year = $190,000*
Pleasantdale School District 107 Enrollment = 837 students
Superintendent Mark Fredisdorf's salary for the 2007/2008 school year= $187,234 and this does not include his monthly travel stipend**
*Salary information received from the Suburban Life Newspaper.
** Salary information received from thechampion.org


Refused to provide art class for the 6th grade
At the October, 2008 BOE meeting, the Superintendent's report included a discussion on the Grade 6 Art Change. A one-time modification to "[t]he rotation of middle school specials was changed at the beginning of this school year." "There was a consensus [the Technology Committee with Middle School specials teachers] that the rotation of specials should be changed as follows: 5th grade: computers, art and music; 6th grade: computers, health and music; 7th grade: music, art and health; 8th grade: computers, art and health." The minutes report that "After some discussion, the Board decided that they would not be revisiting the curriculum change. The current specials rotation will stay in effect. Art teacher Dianne Washburn has been offering 6th grade students before and after school opportunities as part of the transition process. Dianne is also working with Deb Cummens to incorporate art in the current 6th grade health curriculum."

This is a perfect example of why our school board meetings need to be webcast on the Internet. The only discussion that took place was that two of the BOE members whose children were directly impacted by this decision admitted that it should have been handled differently and that their children were upset that for the second year in a row, they would not be receiving art class. In addition, the administration and BOE knew of this change in May yet never disclosed it to the school community. Parents found out about it on the first day of classes.

We know that integrity is highly valued by our community. We strongly argue that school board members who are ultimately responsible for the education of our children must demonstrate the integrity to rise above politics as usual. We have held ourselves to the highest standards of campaign ethics.
1. We have not engaged in negative campaigning such as spreading nonfactual or misleading information.
2. We have not publicly made attacks on any Board candidates or his/her personal or family life.
3. We have not distributed any statements that personally criticizes teachers, administrators, Board candidates or any other members of the Pleasantdale community.

We sense that the incumbents are implying that we have violated campaign ethics. We have NEVER made attacks in public or in private on the board candidate’s personal and family life. As we have stated, we feel Patti and Leandra have served the board well over the past four years but since their children will no longer be in the district we feel it is time for them to step down and allow candidates that have children in the schools to take the reins and do what is best for the children that attend those schools.

Since we do not have the funds for three mass mailings we started this blog so that everyone’s voice can be heard. The first amendment right guarantees freedom of speech. So to honor that right, we chose to allow ALL comments that have come to our blog prior to today. Today, we decided to set up comment moderation because the supporters for the incumbents were getting out of hand. Not only were these supporters attempting to make us look bad, they were making the incumbents look even worse with their very nasty comments. We are certain that Mark, Leandra and Patti would not want their supporters to engage in such low standards of campaign ethics on their behalf.

We hope you agree that Pleasantdale School District continues to improve toward providing the best education for each student. Your vote on April 7 will enable us to keep the momentum going in the best interests of all students and their families. With over 16 years of combined Board of Education experience, we have a track record of ability, dedication, and integrity to make our great district even better. Please don't hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely yours,
Mark Mirabile Leandra Sedlack Patti Essig

We too want the best education for every student. We want to take the district to the next level and know it is possible by working hand in hand with the remaining board members. We have the educational background to maintain solid footing while working to achieve our goals. Please consider voting for our entire slate to keep the district moving forward and implement some much needed changes for the benefit of ALL children.

Sincerely yours
Gina Scaletta-Nelson, Karen O’Halloran, Michael Rak and Lauri Valentin

Supporter?

A supporter of the incumbents is on a roll. This person has taken great pleasure in commenting on our blog (8 times) last evening and several times today, but is afraid to sign their name.

If this supporter is so proud of the incumbents' accomplishments, why won't they sign their name?

This person spent quite a while reading the teacher surveys and then commented, "It is much easier to focus on the school as a whole when your child does not attend that school."

Obviously, there hasn't been much focus while their children were attending if you look at our archaic technology program, outdated math books, money losing preschool/extended day program, communication mishaps, the unnecessary expenditures and our teacher surveys.

Will it only get worse when the incumbents children are gone and they are not in touch with our schools on a daily basis?

Special Education

A commenter asked us to talk about the issues. Below is an issue that we are concerned about.

Special Education

Our current Board of Education approved the Superintendent's recommendation to eliminate the full time Director of Student Services (Special Ed Director) and hire a part-time Director in her place. The current full-time director receives $125,000 annually. This decision is expected to save $75,000 in administrative overhead and increase direct services to students.

How is downsizing from a full time employee to a part-time employee going to increase services to the students? If the district is reducing overhead by $75,000, won’t our district be paying the part-time director $50,000? Seems to us, you could hire someone full time for that kind of money.

Is this decision morally and fiscally prudent?

The children in the special education program are our most at risk and neediest students. Is this decision really in their best interest?

It sounds like this decision is sending a clear message to the families of children in the special education program…their kids are not worth the district's time or money.

More Surveys - Elementary

Someone asked to see the elementary surveys.

We have now taken them down.

The opportunities for success are more prevalent at the elementary school because the principal is supportive and well liked. Too bad the kids can't stay at the elementary school forever.

Same Old, Same Old or CHANGE?

At the candidates' forum, Patti Essig stated, "If you want change, don't vote for me."

Is this the feeling of her entire slate which includes Mark Mirabile and Leandra Sedlack?

If you do want change at Pleasantdale School, vote 4 the candidates of CHANGE!

The Pleasantdale School Board is made up of seven members. Every two years, either three or four seats are up for election. This is the first time in four years that a majority of the seats are open. Our slate needs to win all four seats or things will go back to the same old, same old at Pleasantdale.

Same old outdated technology program but hey, they have a computer cart!
Same old "oversights." How many times have you heard that line in the last three or four years?
Same old mountains of homework on a daily basis. Shouldn't kids have a life outside of school?
Same old strategic plan. They've had it since 2003 yet no one can explain it.
Same old unnecessary expenditures. Brick garages and office renovations.
Same old half day kindergarten program. That way, they can keep charging families for daycare.
Same old exclusiveness. They sent the letter to some of the families, what more do you want?
Same old secret society, oops, um lack of communication.
Same old board meetings. Sit down and shut up. They won't answer your questions.
Same old town hall meeting. Let's talk about test scores for the third year in a row and don't veer off the topic!
Same old ethics violations and lies. Those "rogues" are going to "fire teachers."
Same old lack of respect. Same old dictator.

Do you want the same old, same old; or do you want change?

Vote 4 the wonderful teachers and staff. Vote 4 the children, both yours and ours.

Vote 4 a good school to be even better.

Vote for CHANGE!!

Challengers Bring Talent to 107

The Doings

WILLOW SPRINGS -- I wholeheartedly support the slate of new candidates running for the Pleasantdale Board of Education! It is rare that you will find such dedicated and talented individuals willing to serve the needs of the community. All four candidates have a background in education. Lauri Valentin has a master's degree in music education, Michael Rak has a master's degree in school business management, Gina Scaletta-Nelson has a master's degree in teaching and Karen O'Halloran holds a bachelor's degree and teaches religious education.
These individuals are in touch with what is going on in the world of education and understand what a difficult yet rewarding job teaching can be. I believe it is important for a school board to be able to see both sides of the aisle to make the tough decisions that must be made to keep the district moving forward.

Caroline Marwitz

Priorities Are Off in Pleasantdale District

The Doings

BURR RIDGE --I received a letter from Pleasantdale Superintendent Mark Fredisdorf stating that the current board of education approved changes to the special education program. These changes include getting rid of the full-time director of special education and hiring a part-time replacement. This move is to reduce administrative overhead.

The board should be ashamed of themselves for short changing Pleasantdale's neediest and most at-risk students in the name of reducing overhead. They should have looked into other ways to reduce overhead without putting the special ed students at such a disadvantage. My daughter who is in first grade is receiving more hours of special education then she is in her classroom.
The current director, Maria Smith has been very helpful to me in the last two years. Last year I was faced with the tough decision of whether or not to hold my daughter back in kindergarten or to send her through to first grade knowing that she would struggle. It was my decision to make and the team was very helpful, mostly Smith. I choose to send her to first grade and they have increased her special ed hours.

It's sad that our School Board and administration plans to forge ahead with a remodeling project that will cost the taxpayers over a quarter of a million dollars while putting the needs of the special education students on the back burner. Wake up voters, it's time for a change!

Julie Ryan

New Faces Needed on Pleasantdale Board

The Doings
April 2, 2009

WILLOW SPRINGS -- It is time to put a new face on the Pleasantdale Board of Education. Two of the incumbents on the board running for re-election will not have any children attending Pleasantdale School. In fact, by the summer, a third board member will also not have any children in the district. We need new people on the board that have our children's best interests in mind.

A school board should be comprised of residents that want to move the district forward because their actions will have a direct impact on the children attending the school. How can the best interest of our children be served when the incumbents have no children going to the school they are governing? I say out with the old and in with the new and elect Michael Rak, Karen O'Halloran, Lauri Valentin and Gina Scaletta-Nelson to the Pleasantdale School Board!

Jolene Carlson

Teacher Morale

A commenter asked, "Could you please share more information regarding the staff survey you talked about at the candidate meeting that showed morale was so low. When was it done and did they list specifically why it was low?"

The surveys have now been taken down. They were up long enough for readers to guage teacher morale.

Anonymous commented:

"You can try and win the teachers over but they still aren't voting to elect the four of you. Everyone cares about them and their opinion but why would they put themselves in that position?"

Really? If everyone cared about the teachers and their opinion, why weren't they allowed to attend the candidates' forum? Furthermore, what "position" are you speaking of them being put in?

These were just some of the many, many pages of the survey teachers filled out last May.

The school board saw these surveys regarding the low teacher morale and do you want to know what they did about it? NOTHING!

As Patti Essig said at the forum, "If you want change, don't vote for me." Obviously, she is perfectly happy with the low teacher morale.

We think it is high time for change. It's time to show our staff a little respect!

Editor's note:

Anonymous asked: How do you as Board members plan to raise morale?

First of all, we would start by treating the teachers and staff with respect. We would open the lines of communication and encourage constructive dialogue between administration and staff. We would promote training and support not only in regard to curriculum, but in the rapidly changing world of technology as well. We would recognize and praise the good job our teachers are doing everyday. We would review the budget to ensure that adequate funds reach the classroom. We would loosen the reigns on the "dress code." We would value their opinions and passion for teaching. We would encourage creativity and support their decisions. We could go on and on. The bottom line is we would treat them as we would like to be treated. These are a few of the many things we would like to accomplish to raise teacher morale.

Shameful and Shameless

"Did anyone see the Pleasantdale newsletter with the incumbent candidates on the cover and then profiled inside? Apparently the rest of the Board hasn't contributed anything worthwhile recently. Is this self-promotion legal? The timing of the mailing is a little suspect as well."

"I thought the same thing when I saw yesterday's newsletter then I remembered thinking that there was something that didn't feel right about the previous newsletter as well. I pulled it out and the front cover was profiles of each board member instead of what the Board is doing to improve the school.

Does that happen at the same time every year or only in years where there is a contested election?

I won't take anything away from their accomplishments or commitment, but remember in life, perception is reality. If the Board members can't speak with an independent voice then perhaps they shouldn't be profiled independently. Sorry I missed the forum. Sounds like it was great. This is good reading."

Editor's Note:

How convenient that the timing of this "newsletter" came out just days before the election. Yes, it is meant to sway voters toward the incumbents. The same thing was done with the last "newsletter." Apparently not much is going on in the district that they can share with their constituents so they spend taxpayer dollars to send out a newsletter that says essentially the same thing as the last newsletter in order to keep the incumbents in the public eye.

Here's something they could have informed the community about: the summer construction projects. Obviously they don't want that to be in the public eye because of the community backlash they will receive in regard to the ridiculous waste of taxpayer funds.

Or, maybe they could have written about our wonderful technology program and the great strides we are making in bringing state-of-the-art technology advancements into the classrooms.

Yesterday's newsletter makes our work all the more harder. We don't have the deep pockets that our opponents and their committee have. That is one reason you don't see too many of our signs out in the community. We have had many requests for yard signs but sadly have had to turn most down because of a lack of signs. We won't be sending a out a mass mailing to 2900 residences because again, we don't have the funds to match the three separate mailings you will receive from them. We have, however, the energy to deliver them personally by going door to door in the community to meet the residents.

What we also have is a community that is not happy with the same old, same old. It is up to our supporters to get the word out on who would be best to continue to lead our school in a new direction.

We will continue to say that Patti and Leandra have served well on our school board but it is now time to pass the torch on to those who have children in the schools that will be directly impacted by the decisions made.

It is our hope that they will continue their service to the community by running for the Lyons Township High School Board of Education where they will be sure to make an impact with their technology foresight and strategic planning abilities.

Finally, we say shame on your Dr. Fredisdorf for wasting the taxpayers money with your propaganda newsletters. Why don't you spend that money on bringing interactive whiteboards into our schools so we can keep up with the surrounding districts!

Editor's note #2:

"I totally agree. I was disgusted at seeing that those school board members posted their profiles in the newsletter. And then continued on to yesterdays newsletter as well about how they completed courses. Well excuse me but anybody can take and complete a course. That doesn't make you the best man for the job. I want to know who pays for those newsletters? Can somebody please answer that?Because if it comes out of my tax money, then shame on the present school board and the super for using my money for that. If these other people campaigning have to use their own money why does the present board get a free ride.The news letter should be to inform us of what is going on with our school and students. Not for campaigning!"

Who is paying for these newsletters? You are!

"I too was appalled with the Pleasantdale newsletter. Any candidate with an ounce of self-respect would not have allowed this blatant attempt at influencing the election. Surely this must be illegal and reportable to the board of elections?"

This is being investigated.

Pleasantdale School Board needs to get back on track

Suburban Life Publications
Mar 30, 2009

Kudos to Pleasantdale for winning so many awards! I am sure the hours and hours of test prep is paying off. Unfortunately, test scores don’t mean anything when you have one-third of a cohort failing their grade level curriculum and many of the district's children reading below grade level.

Pleasantdale needs to shift their focus from standardized test prep to mastering the Illinois learning standards. The current School Board fails to recognize that a standardized test merely ranks the students against their peers. What is does not evaluate is critical thinking, creativity and the ability to transfer knowledge from one subject area to the next. Pleasantdale School administrators rely solely on test scores to put kids in more challenging classes without teacher input.

This takes away the teacher’s ability to evaluate students and makes them dependent on test scores instead of their own instincts. All this dependency on testing leads to stagnation in the classroom and is boring and unchallenging to the students. It’s time to move away from pumping their fists into the air to shout out another accolade and get down to the business of really teaching kids.

Pleasantdale is too dependent on parents to do their job by putting more teaching responsibility on the parents while they focus on raising the test scores. Our teachers are our greatest asset, not money or new programs. I support the election of a new school board and feel the slate of candidates comprised of Valentin, O’Halloran, Scaletta-Nelson and Rak is what that district needs to get learning back on track. Mary Jo Slivinski, Willow Springs

More comments...

Yesterday our blog surpassed all the goals and expectations we set for this open dialogue type of forum. We had 129 visitors and over 751 page views, not to mention countless comments and emails!

Below you will find an assortment of comments we received. Often times comments are tucked away on various pages and we wanted to bring them to the main page. Enjoy...

"As a parent in this community and from Pleasantdale district I must say that before my kids started school I started hearing complaints from other parents. And I blew it off. Now that my kids have been in school for a few years, I have come to notice that things are actually getting worse. So who do you think we should blame. Who is responsible for the morale of the teachers, the curriculum at the schools, the hiring and firing of teachers. As far as I'm concerned this board hasn't failed totally, not yet. But they are well on their way.Can anybody please tell me exactly what this present board has done for the good of our kids.I don't think as you put it, this slate of four has looked for negative things to say about the current school board or the Superintendent. They themselves have proven not to care. And that's too bad, because we have a bunch of great kids. And nobody is looking out for them."

"I say if we need safety improvements, we probably have the money to do it. But, let the Board publish the safety report that they are using to make these decisions, so everyone knows what the facts are. We're all grown-ups we can understand a responsible expense in face of a real need. Not giving the full report (story) to the public make it seem like there's something to hide.Lincoln said he believed that the common man given the facts had the ability to make a decision for the common good."

"...I think that our children are more at risk walking down School Street than sitting in the classrooms. It is my understanding that the office staff at the Elementary School are not to buzz people in that they do not know, so strangers should not be allowed to wander the halls. I also liked Karen O'Halloran's comment that if the safety was so important why wasn't it addressed two years ago when they put on the addition? I am not against construction or renovation when needed but doesn't $240,000 sound like a lot of money for a small office?"

"I also attended last night's forum and was equally impressed by the amount of parents that were there. Unfortunately I can't say that I was impressed by the way the present board answered some of those questions or rather that they couldn't. Why is it that these 4 new people running had more information than the board that is in place now? That left a bad taste in my mouth. Up until now I thought that the present board had done a so so job, but now I see I was totally wrong. I am definitely in for change."

"...kudos to the Shah's for an informative evening."

"The outrage should be directed at the current owners of the strategic plan who could not highlight the key strategies and actions described in this “purported" document, not Gina who has actively researched the whereabouts of this plan. The hard work put into developing this plan should be shared with all stakeholders, not sitting on a shelf somewhere. A strategic plan is an active document under constant review. I believe in solutions and have respectfully requested a copy of the strategic plan for review in addition to asking how I can participate in the strategic plan committee. Gina’s dedication and passion for wanting to serve on the board is commendable and exemplified in the Safe Routes to School Grant and the amount of time she has taken to research the informative data she provided on the technology that should be implemented in District 107 schools." DMarkmann

"Since I know how much this blog hates rumors, I would also like to stop a rumor before it starts. Dr. Fredisdorf was assigned his seat for the candidates forum. The first row of seats were reserved for certain people and Dr. Fredisdorf was one of them."

"I agree that there are rules that govern the way a meeting is run. However, I do not believe there is a rule that says a Board member cannot address the audience. Be they Board Members, Village Trustees, or State Representatives, all make statements, take positions, and conduct conversations while in a public meeting. It seems that our School Board has imposed it's own gag rule when a non-member offers a comment or asks a question. Anyone elected to a government position can make a statement, or present an argument for one side of the position or the other. It is through these discussions and debates that one would hope a good decision is rendered. When a Board or a committee votes then it is the consensus of that governing body that is transmitted to the public as a decision.

The other fallacy that was aired last night is the notion that the School Board does not discuss these issues without putting them on a publicized agenda so that everyone who is interested can listen. While I concur with the person who made that statement, the Board would actually have to put the issue brought before it on an agenda so it could be discussed in public rather than responding with a letter. How does the Board discuss what goes in those letters? Do they do this in closed session so that the public can not hear the discussion of the response?"

"This is amazing...we haven't had this kind of dialog about the school in the 15 years I have lived here. Regardless of who I vote for, I want to thank the creators of this blog. This type of communication is long over due and should be embraced by the school board.

I wasn't able to stay for the entire meeting but was there at 6:30 and found it suspect that the Superintendent was on the stage at the beginning of the meeting. This was a political event and he should not have been given a reserved seat and for that matter no one should have been given a reserved seat. It was absolutely inappropriate.

As for the Board not engaging parents at Board Meetings, I would encourage folks to attend public meetings in other jurisdictions. The public is allowed to speak and the elected officials do discuss the issues not hiding behind the Open Meetings Act.

While it would be nice if folks attended meetings and candidates forum regularly, research shows that more people attend these types of events when they are dissatisfied.

Teacher morale is dangerously low and yet the administration just continues to push them around. When you reassign teachers based on personal issues rather than professional accomplishments and then don't provide the appropriate training, inevitably morale will decline. When you force teachers to shove extra lessons at kids in the name of test scores, you demoralize everything they believe in and impact their passion for their students and their profession. I do agree that this bribery aka 'incentive' is unjustified. I like the idea of checking back in with former students on whether they felt unnecessary pressure to perform. How is the child who simply doesn't test well supposed to feel when his classmates get the 'incentive'. It pits these kids against each other and just isn't fair.

In closing, as I started with, regardless of who folks decide to cast a vote for, this blog has provided folks with the ability to voice their concerns in a non-threatening environment.

Best of luck to all the candidates."

"I wanted to attend last night's forum, but could not due to family constraints. If I had attended, I wanted to make a comment as follows.

In less than two years of involvement with the district (our oldest child is in first grade), we have heard many negative comments about the current superintendent. I don't know the superintendent personally, however, the very fact that there seems to be a widespread perception of a dictatorial style is concerning. When you hear the same feedback repeatedly, the validity of that feedback increases.

The fact that administrators were at the forum feels inappropriate, as well. If there is already a climate where the superintendent squashes honest feedback or dissenting opinions, this was a perfect demonstration.

I am disheartened to hear that the morale of our teachers is poor, because our teachers have a difficult enough job without having to worry that a dissenting opinion will put them on a "black list".

I believe that the board members are elected to balance the will of the superintendent. If you can provide the "check and balance" you tout, I will be a supporter - not just in the election, but after that as well."

If your comment did not appear above, it may be that we are preparing research in order to respond.

Comments and Notes

Anonymous said...

I attended last night's candidates forum and was pleased to see so many interested parents. With such pathetic attendance at Board Meetings, Town Hall Meetings, etc, last night's attendance numbers should send a message to the administration and current board that the status quo will no longer be tolerated.

I have felt personal frustration with the school, its administration and a handful of teachers but I didn't realize how widespread the level of disatisfaction is. If folks were happy with the way things are going, they would not have given up 2 hours of their evening to attend the forum.

The current board's inability to answer basic questions about a strategic plan that they developed; their assertion that "if you want change, then don't vote for me," and Leandra's absolutely irresponsible notion that it isn't her job to research what other schools are doing in technology made my decision on Tuesday a very easy one. It is time for a change.

The fresh ideas that I heard last night from the challengers were spot on in terms of technology, motivating younger kids to learn, transparency and open communication. It was apparent that they did their homework and that the current board underestimated their intelligence and the intelligence of the audience. They simply looked foolish and uniformed. Their body language, snickering, head shaking and eye rolling was childish.

Beefing up our kids' technology skills is a must yet the current board thinks they have more than tackled this issue. Perhaps a day in Mod Tech would make them think differently.

We must also continue to question the heavy emphasis on test taking. Last night was the first night I heard about teachers essentially bribing kids to do well on the Explore Test. Each one of those teachers, as well as the administration, should be ashamed of themselves yet the incumbent Board Members were proud of this practice. What happened to being proud of kids for simply 'doing their best"?

Opening up Board Meetings or creating another forum for parents and the community to voice their opninion is exactly what we need. The idea that parents, teachers and concerned citizens sit through Board Meetings and don't get their questions answered is ludicrous. I would like to see whatever law they believe requires them to ignore the very people they were elected to represent.

Lastly, let me make a suggestion...instead of spending $200,000 to remodel a 800 square foot office under the guise of 'security', let me suggest you buy our children some laptops so they can teach themselves what the untrained technology teacher can't. For $200,000, I can build a 1,600 square foot house with a security system.

Hats off to the PTA for putting the forum together and to the Park District for hosting.

P.S. Did anyone find the Superintendent's attendance and front row seat curious?

(Editor's note: The front row seats were reserved for the administration, school board members, local government officials and media. Dr. Fredisdorf chose to sit there while the others were scattered throughout the audience, a known Delphi technique, to take the pulse of what was being said among the audience.

While we are very grateful for the few staff members that attended the forum, we were saddened to learn that the rest of the staff and teachers were admonished that unless they lived in the district, they were not allowed to attend. Aren't the staff and teachers an integral part of our school community? Sad, really.)